Meeting of Confucius and Old Tan in the Chuang-tzu

[lienshan]

In philosophical terms I don't think the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu is particularly developed having a primitive notion of Tao which is closer to Shen Tao than Lao-tzu; and it lacks the philosophical maturity of the latter. Though as a book of mystical poetry the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu stands as a monumentally beautiful text.

[dawei]

In philosophical terms I don't think the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu is particularly developed having a primitive notion of Tao which is closer to Shen Tao than Lao-tzu; and it lacks the philosophical maturity of the latter. Though as a book of mystical poetry the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu stands as a monumentally beautiful text.

 

I would say he actually is more developed on some level as he seems to espouse a non-dual unity in a way that others did not. LZ is simply presenting a very simple description with little to no explanation. ZZ is willing to argue that being cannot come from non-being... wonder if he is actually critical of some ideas which we find in LZ... but he could not name who this originates with.

 

Which may mean that the Mawangdui's addition of Chapter 1 opening lines are really a ZZ idea...

[penfold]

In philosophical terms I don't think the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu is particularly developed having a primitive notion of Tao which is closer to Shen Tao than Lao-tzu; and it lacks the philosophical maturity of the latter. Though as a book of mystical poetry the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu stands as a monumentally beautiful text.

 

Made me laugh.

 

I will however try briefly to justify my original claim that the Chuang-tzu represents a more complex philosophy than the Lao-tzu:

 

In the Lao-tzu we are given two main terms the tao and te. Tao is usually (though not entirely consistently - hence my suspicious of multiple authors) analysed in terms of wu; most famously in terms of wu-wei but also in terms of wu-ming (no-name) and wu-xing (no-form). Thus the Tao is essentially understood in terms of absence/nothing. This matches with many of the images of emptiness given; from spoke'd wheels to the valley. A second theme which is drawn uses the analogy of water; of flow and settling low. A third theme is found in the idea of simplicity - un-carved wood, un-bleached silk etc... We also have the idea (which is very close to Shen Tao) of the Tao as unified; there is one 'great' Tao and because of this the Lao-tzu is rightly recognized as deeply anti-Confucian (who proposed many 'taos' - the tao of a ruler, the tao of a fisherman, the tao of a builder etc...).

 

Te, as best as I can understand it; is the in-working of the Tao in the myriad things (people, and the ruler, in particular). Unlike Shen Tao, who proposes that that understanding the Tao is non-ethical, and that everything inevitably follows the Tao (ming - destiny); the Lao-tzu proposes that our te is fully expressed when we are at our most 'natural' (tzu-jan) and practice wu-wei (action-less action/ non-action / ego-less action / natural-action).

 

The Lao-tzu is also explicitly written from the perspective of ruler of a state; and while it reaches the proto-anarchic conclusion that if a ruler cultivates his te then the empire will be ordered along primitivist lines; it is none the less a political, as well as a spiritual, text.

 

While there is great wisdom in the Lao-tzu it is not a developed philosophy; it sets out its own position(s) but does not engage in debate or refutations of others; and its concerns are fairly narrow, really focused on a few key ideas - which it addresses poetically and without any full analysis. Someone, I can't remember who, described it rather beautifully as "mountian-peaks emerging from the mist". We are not presented with arguments; only conclusions (or, if you prefer anti-conclusions!)

 

On the other hand the Chuang-tzu has far more directed philosophical concerns. It spends much more time time analyzing the notion of tao through arugment. It seems on balance (and I am aware there are many who would disagree) to hold the view that there are multiple taos which are 'ways of being in the world' and are mostly defined by reference to each other (suprisingly akin to Hiedegger's notion of dasein). The 'sage' is the one who can 'illuminate' (ming) them by letting his mind (hsin) roam (yu) between them - standing on the 'axis of the taos'/'potter's wheel of heaven'.

 

However the Chaung-tzu also deals with the following other philosophical concerns (this list is not complete):

 

i) The relativism of perspective (Ch1)

ii) An analysis of nature in terms of change (hua) and what is inherently so (gua-jan) (Ch1, 4, &6)

iii) An analysis of death in terms of change (hua) (Ch 4)

iv) A radical notion of linguistic pragmatism (yin shih) (Ch 2)

v) Skeptism (Ch 1 & 2)

vi) Use of the Useless (Ch 1 & 4)

vii) Spontinetiy and skillful activity (Ch 3 & 4)

viii) The relationship between heaven and man (Ch 2, 4, 5, 6)

 

Moreover in the Chuang-tzu the following assumptions are directly attacked through detailed argument:

 

"Usefulness is good" (Mohist)

"Death is bad" (Yanist)

"Duty and Goodwill are important" (Confucian)

"The mind (hsin) should be cultivated" (Mencius)

"Disputation (pien) leads to knowledge" (Mohist and Sophist)

"Deeming (wei shih) has a realtionship to reality (ie nominalism)" (Mohist and Confucian)

"Skill is good" (Mohist and Shen Tao)

"The existence of a 'Great Tao' (monism)" (Shen Tao)

"There is a distinction between the activity of heaven and the activity of man" (Confucian)

"Bodily mutilation shows a lack of te" (Confucian, Yangist)

"We can develop a successful criterion for knowledge." (Confucian, Mohist, Sophist).

 

........................

 

I am not saying one should prefer the philosophy of the Chuang-tzu to the Lao-tzu - that is not a decision anyone can make for someone else. However I think it is undeniable that the Chuang-tzu has significantly more philosophical development and maturity.

Edited May 3, 2013 by penfold

[Marblehead]

I am not saying one should prefer the philosophy of the Chuang-tzu to the Lao-tzu - that is not a decision anyone can make for someone else. However I think it is undeniable that the Chuang-tzu has significantly more philosophical development and maturity.

Yeah, I think it is still important for one to read both and understand them both as well as possible. I have never tried to place a greater value of one over the other. I think that we do get a much fuller understanding of the truth of the universe and its ways if we read both. (And I need to pay more attention to what I read. - Editorial comment.)

[penfold]

Yeah, I think it is still important for one to read both and understand them both as well as possible.

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

When I read the Chuang-tzu it is like engaging in the most wonderful puzzle-box; every passage adding inflection to every other. My views on it are always changing (my copy of Graham's translation travels with me everywhere and is now so heavily annotated that reading it covers my fingers in graphite). It is an intellectual exercise which opens up my way of thinking and reading it gives me huge joy.

 

The Lao-tzu on the other hand beings me peace. Reading it often leads to times of quiet meditation. I find myself repeating phrases from it as I fall asleep, and when confronted by the numinous beauty of life. It is a spiritual exercise and a way of being. It makes me a better person.

 

Both add so much richness to my life, and I am profoundly grateful to all those faceless people in history whose work and dedication has meant that a C21st South London boy has access to them.

[dawei]

In the Lao-tzu we are given two main terms the tao and te. Tao is usually (though not entirely consistently - hence my suspicious of multiple authors) analysed in terms of wu; most famously in terms of wu-wei but also in terms of wu-ming (no-name) and wu-xing (no-form). Thus the Tao is essentially understood in terms of absence/nothing. This matches with many of the images of emptiness given; from spoke'd wheels to the valley. A second theme which is drawn uses the analogy of water; of flow and settling low. A third theme is found in the idea of simplicity - un-carved wood, un-bleached silk etc... We also have the idea (which is very close to Shen Tao) of the Tao as unified; there is one 'great' Tao and because of this the Lao-tzu is rightly recognized as deeply anti-Confucian (who proposed many 'taos' - the tao of a ruler, the tao of a fisherman, the tao of a builder etc...).

 

I do agree that the LZ is more a brief distillation of a few concepts but many of them may pre-date the text. We should remember that the Guodian bamboo is not all the chapters but they seem to establish there is no anti-Confucian sentiment seen in later versions. But we easily see many concepts as potentially influencing the text.

 

We may do good to consider what concepts may of influenced the Mawangdui text as well; which would easily put lots of ideas available up to that point.

 

 

While there is great wisdom in the Lao-tzu it is not a developed philosophy; it sets out its own position(s) but does not engage in debate or refutations of others; and its concerns are fairly narrow, really focused on a few key ideas - which it addresses poetically and without any full analysis.

 

I do think this is an important understanding.

[penfold]

We should remember that the Guodian bamboo is not all the chapters but they seem to establish there is no anti-Confucian sentiment seen in later versions.

 

Interesting. Could you elaborate?

[dawei]

The Guodian Bundles have the following Laozi Chapters:

Bundle A: 19, 66, 46, 30, 15, 64b, 37, 63, 2, 32, 25, 5, 16, 64a, 56, 57, 55, 44, 9

Bundle B: 59, 48, 20, 13, 41, 52, 45, 54

Bundle C: 17/18, 35, 31, 64b

 

The one chapter most often used to show anti=Confucian sentiment is Chapter 19:

 

In the standard text that most refer to, it seems to exhort to get rid of: "Sageliness", "Benevolence" and "Righteousness"; Confucian hallmark virtues.

 

In the Guodian, these three characters are other characters with no Confucian/Mencius implication. Hendricks said in his Guodian commentary concerning the exchange of characters: "where later inserted as substitutions, possibly as a way of making the chapter a statement against the philosophy of Mencius".

 

 

It should also be realized that the Guodian bundles included many Confucian texts as well.

[lienshan]

It should also be realized that the Guodian bundles included many Confucian texts as well.

 

The teacher in the Guodian (8 km outside the Chu capitol Ying) tomb was burried together with his own private library. He had trained the royal children how to brush characters on bamboo slips. He had read aloud from philosophical bamboo books kept in the royal library in Ying and afterwards brought the written dictates to his home.

 

That's why we now know, that Laozi's original manuscripts, crafts, notes, etc. were kept in the royal library in Ying. The socalled Guodian Tao Te Ching is first hand copies, brushed by children learning how to brush, of parts of Laozi's writings before the Tao Te Ching was published.

 

A plausible reason why the manuscript was exactly there could be, that Laozi was a member of the royal family, a Chu prince, and was in charge of the royal library That's why I think that the beginnig of this Zhuangzi chapter 13 story might have a deeper meaning than A.C. Graham suggests:

 

Kong Zi went west to deposit some books into the library in the state of Zhou.

Zi Lu gave him this suggestion:

"It's fairly well known that the one in charge of receiving books at the library in Zhou was the librarian known as Lao Dan, but he's since retired and returned to his home. If you, Master, want to deposit books there, then you might consider asking him about how to do it."

Kong Zi said: "Good idea."

He went to see Lao Dan, but Lao Dan wasn't able to help.

 

That Laozi wasn't able to help is the pointe!

It was namely Shen Dao that had "deposited in the library of Zhou" by writing the Shuo Gua §1 in the Zhou Book of Changes, and Laozi had been against. The Zhuangzi chapter 3 story about Qin Shi mourning Lao Dan's death indicates, that Laozi withdraw from the Huang Lao School after the incident. And the last line of Zhuangzi's chapter 5 Toeless story tells the reason why!

 

But some of Laozi's writings must have circulated among other taoists before the Tao Te Ching was published. For example was Zhuangzi's chapter 7 "Yang Zi Ju asked Lao Dan" story impossible to write, if he hadn't read Laozi's chapters 17-18, which in the original Gudian version is one single text.

[penfold]

The Guodian Bundles have the following Laozi Chapters:

Bundle A: 19, 66, 46, 30, 15, 64b, 37, 63, 2, 32, 25, 5, 16, 64a, 56, 57, 55, 44, 9

Bundle B: 59, 48, 20, 13, 41, 52, 45, 54

Bundle C: 17/18, 35, 31, 64b

 

The one chapter most often used to show anti=Confucian sentiment is Chapter 19:

 

Thank you dawei . Looking at the chapters listed what I find most interesting is how many of the classic 'tao' passages (esp ch 42) are missing.

 

Perhaps, rather like the Gospel of John in Christianity, the Lao-tzu went through a period of 'orthodox-ization' later in its history.

 

With John's gospel we find later additions (eg John 1:1-14) which seem to have been added to counter supposed 'Gnostic' elements within the text; so perhaps in the Lao-tzu we have later additions which emphasize the 'unified tao' as a way of countering any lingering Confucian elements.

 

Really fascinating...

Edited May 8, 2013 by penfold

[penfold]

A plausible reason why the manuscript was exactly there could be, that Laozi was a member of the royal family, a Chu prince, and was in charge of the royal library That's why I think that the beginnig of this Zhuangzi chapter 13 story might have a deeper meaning than A.C. Graham suggests:

 

Kong Zi went west to deposit some books into the library in the state of Zhou.

Zi Lu gave him this suggestion:

"It's fairly well known that the one in charge of receiving books at the library in Zhou was the librarian known as Lao Dan, but he's since retired and returned to his home. If you, Master, want to deposit books there, then you might consider asking him about how to do it."

Kong Zi said: "Good idea."

He went to see Lao Dan, but Lao Dan wasn't able to help.

 

The problem with this analysis is how the passage continues:

 

Then he (Confucius) went through the twelve classics explaining them.

Old Tan interrupted his explanation 'Too long winded I would rather heat the gist of it.'

'The gist is goodwill and duty.'

 

The reference to the twelve classics gives this story a late date. The attribution of 'classic' 經 to the Confucian texts (as these clearly are - hence goodwill and duty) only happened in the Han Dynasty. The fact there are twelve means that not only do we have the six Confucian classics of canon (六經), but also the wei-shu texts which are also Han.

 

This means that the story is only being written in the Han at at least 250 years after the events it is meant to record. Even assuming that these texts are meant to be historical (and I am really skeptical of that - see my OP) they cannot be relied upon for historical accuracy; any more than someone writing today could be relied upon to accurate record a conversation had in 1750. (That is not to say it is impossible they are accurate, merely that without any earlier corroboration it would be bad historical method to argue so).

Edited May 8, 2013 by penfold

[lienshan]

You have already described the age of the library story in your first post.

 

What struck me reading them again was this. In the passages Old Tan seems far closer to the philosophy found in the inner chapters of the Chuang-tzu than that found in the Lao-tzu. So much so that rather than seeing these stories as fictional conversations between the author of the Lao-tzu and Confucius it is far more profitable to see them as fictional conversations between the author of the inner chapters of the Chuang-tzu and Confucius.

 

It's much more interesting to see, how you read "... Old Tan refused. Thereupon..." from the author of the inner chapters point of view? Why was Confucius not allowed to deposit his classics in the Zhou library?

[penfold]

You have already described the age of the library story in your first post.

 

 

It's much more interesting to see, how you read "... Old Tan refused. Thereupon..." from the author of the inner chapters point of view? Why was Confucius not allowed to deposit his classics in the Zhou library?

 

Sorry to repeat myself; as you may have gathered I'm a talkative bugger, so repetition is a constant hazard.

 

In terms of why Confucius was forbidden from depositing his books, my reading of the story is that it is primarily about establishing the priority of Taoism over Confucianism (there I go again, repeating my first post again ). So we can find an easy motive for this refusal: it makes Confucius all the more subservient to Taoism that his 'twelve classics' are of insufficient quality for Old Tan's library.

Edited May 8, 2013 by penfold

[lienshan]

He refused before he knew the quality?

 

While Old Tan is mentioned in the inner chapters of Chuang-tzu he is not identified as the author of the Lao-tzu (a book the author of the inner chapters was probably unaware of and never references) and is a relatively minor character.

 

When I read this inner chapter 5 passage:

 

Lao Dan said:
"Why not straighten him out by showing him how life and death are linked on a single branch,

and how approval and disapproval are linked on a single thread?"

 

then I spontanously think of the Tao Te Ching chapters 50 and 2

Edited May 8, 2013 by lienshan

[penfold]

He refused before he knew the quality?

 

 

Nice observation .

 

Well I suppose it depends on your reading; to paraphrase in English:

 

Either:

Old Tan was unwilling to help. He asked Confucius to explain them. (ie Old Tan refuses then he asks about them.)

 

Or:

Old Tan was unwilling to help: he asked Confucius to explain them. (ie Old Tan refuses because he asks about them.)

 

Obviously I would prefer the latter reading - though, in all honesty, I think the former is more plausible. However even if we accept the former; that Old Tan refused the books before seeing them; it is far from inconsistent with the model of Taoist sages who often refuse help when asked. See, for example, Leih-tzu's master in Ch 7, Tzu-k'uei and Chu Ch 6, or the opening two dialogues of Ch 7.

 

 

Lao Dan said:

"Why not straighten him out by showing him how life and death are linked on a single branch,

and how approval and disapproval are linked on a single thread?"

 

then I spontanously think of the Tao Te Ching chapters 50 and 2

 

It seems to me that the point of the Ch 5 Chuang-tzu passage part of the theme that death and life are only 'deemed' (是 / 非) good and bad by virtue of words; in reality they are part of the unbroken process of change (化); see, for example, the middle three dialogues of Ch 6.

 

As for Ch 2 Lao-tzu it seems to be saying that values are synchronous; ie that the short requires the long in order to be short. I don't think the Ch 5 Chuang-tzu passage is saying this about life and death at all; it is not about their synchronous nature, but that an attack on ethical nominalism - ie deeming 'life' and 'death' as 'good' and 'bad'.

 

I agree that there is a thematic link between Ch 5 Chuang-tz & Ch 50 Lao-tzu extracts in that both see an overvaluing of life in negative terms. However in the Chuang-tzu extract the problem is that Confucius is in error because he is mutilated by heaven in his need to deem (是 / 非). In the Lao-tzu extract on the other hand makes the claim that overvaluing life leads to death. These ideas are not mutually exclusive, but neither are they all that similar.

[lienshan]

Well I suppose it depends on your reading; to paraphrase in English

 

The chinese characters are 不許

 

Richard Sears lists these possibilities: to promise / to approve / to permit / to praise / to commend / ( said of a young girl ) to be betrothed / to promise to marry / to expect / perhaps / maybe / ( said of a person's age ) about / a little more than / a place / a final particle / so / this / a Chinese family name

 

but Lao Tan would not promise (to marry the classics of Confucius to the library of Zhou). Thereupon ...

 

because he didn't knew them and that's why Confucius had to explain them.

That'll say the scene is two fathers arranging a marriage

 

 

I read/translate the chapter 5 passage this way:

 

Old Tan said: He is disorderly not continuosly to indulge in that.

He regards death and life as one string, what's to regard the admissible and the not admissible as one unit.

He could loosen his shackles and manacles if they are admissible?

Toeless said: Heaven punishes him. How are they admissible to loosen?

 

The subject of the conversation is in my way of reading this Analects text:

 

The Master said, "A sage it is not mine to see; could I see a man of real talent and virtue, that would satisfy me." The Master said, "A good man it is not mine to see; could I see a man possessed of constancy, that would satisfy me. Having not and yet affecting to have, empty and yet affecting to be full, straitened and yet affecting to be at ease - it is difficult with such characteristics to have constancy."

 

Laozi's Tao Te Ching point of view is: Sages are not acting 聖人無為

 

Toeless's last sentence, pointing at the religeous aspect, might challenge Laozi's point of view?

Edited May 10, 2013 by lienshan

[dawei]

Thank you dawei . Looking at the chapters listed what I find most interesting is how many of the classic 'tao' passages (esp ch 42) are missing.

 

Perhaps, rather like the Gospel of John in Christianity, the Lao-tzu went through a period of 'orthodox-ization' later in its history.

 

With John's gospel we find later additions (eg John 1:1-14) which seem to have been added to counter supposed 'Gnostic' elements within the text; so perhaps in the Lao-tzu we have later additions which emphasize the 'unified tao' as a way of countering any lingering Confucian elements.

 

Really fascinating...

 

Many important themes are missing... water.... mother...

[footprint]

I have copies of the Lao Tzu, in an attempt to begin a comparative study.

However, I have yet to read the Chuang Tzu.

I have of course read quotes and I find it interesting that you find an

idiosyncrasy in the text. Would you also call it a philosophy?

In what little knowledge I have, the man was as outspoken as it gets

and no cunningness could pin him down.

All discussion is arguably academic. For my part I am loving this thread.

May the Stars shine upon the Way.

[Marblehead]

In what little knowledge I have, the man was as outspoken as it gets

and no cunningness could pin him down.

One of the reason I enjoyed reading him the first time. I think the first translaion I read was Lin Yutang's.

 

I think it wouldn't be accurate to call it a stand-alone philosophy though. I think it is more at building on those parts of the TTC that he thought were of value. He didn't always agree with Lao Tzu. (Afterall, he was an Anarchist. Hehehe.)

[rene]

One of the reason I enjoyed reading him the first time. I think the first translaion I read was Lin Yutang's.

 

I think it wouldn't be accurate to call it a stand-alone philosophy though. I think it is more at building on those parts of the TTC that he thought were of value. He didn't always agree with Lao Tzu. (Afterall, he was an Anarchist. Hehehe.)

 

footprint, hi and welcome!

 

Oh... I think it would be just delightful thinking of ChuangTzu as a stand alone philosophy!

 

His 'building on parts of the TTC'' can be compared with taking the uncarved block and cutting it up into little toothpicks...

 

Still, I like that he has a voice here, in Marblehead. (-:

 

warm regards

[Marblehead]

Still, I like that he has a voice here, in Marblehead. (-:

 

warm regards

Yep. I will mention him whenever I get the opportunity. Hehehe.

 

 

Edit to add: I don't get the opportunity to talk about Nietzsche very often here but I do try to look for any the chance, should one present itself.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Marblehead